U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:20 PM
 
Location: CA--> NEK VT--> Pitt Co, NC
379 posts, read 313,280 times
Reputation: 418

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by CMichele View Post
Have you considered colonization in the regions of you ancestors, OP?
How would that identify the haplogroup for the other 81%?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:23 PM
 
Location: Illinois
3,168 posts, read 4,463,441 times
Reputation: 5596
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
Certainly. :-)

"So maybe the better question is... how is the haplogroup assigned? And how could it be that one group would be dominant even if that group is assigned to the smaller/est share of one's chromosomes? There has to be some methodology to how that works. What is that?"
Paternal haplogroups tend to be accurate, from what I understand, since they are slower to mutate as opposed to maternal haplogroups.

Again, uptree there was an ancestor on the direct line who belonged to that haplogroup.

No one is telling you that your haplogroup is your ancestry. But it is a very small part of it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:29 PM
 
Location: Illinois
3,168 posts, read 4,463,441 times
Reputation: 5596
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
How would that identify the haplogroup for the other 81%?
I don't believe that it does.

Doing a direct haplogroup search is special to me for a special reason. But I also advocate heavily for autosomal testing. And even health reports.

Your journey is your journey. There is no right nor wrong approach here. When I don't know your journey and missing information, all I can add is what I think may be helpful.

Right?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:30 PM
 
Location: CA--> NEK VT--> Pitt Co, NC
379 posts, read 313,280 times
Reputation: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMichele View Post
Paternal haplogroups tend to be accurate, from what I understand, since they are slower to mutate as opposed to maternal haplogroups.

Again, uptree there was an ancestor on the direct line who belonged to that haplogroup.

No one is telling you that your haplogroup is your ancestry. But it is a very small part of it.
I am not disputing that R-L21 is the haplogroup for the 17% of my dad's DNA.

My question is why was that given more weight and determined to be the main haplogroup designation over whatever would coincide with the 81% of his DNA results?

I get it that plenty of people get this odd result and don't care to question it, but I prefer to understand the logic behind something that seems incongruous.

Does that make sense? Why was the 17% determined to be primary? Why would anyone's DNA result ever come back with a haplogroup that wasn't not associated with the highest percentage ethnicity of their DNA?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:34 PM
 
877 posts, read 891,657 times
Reputation: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
Say what now?

Seriously. I think 23 & Me has lost their minds.

My dad is 81% SSA, 17.1% Euro and the rest native american.

His father's dead, but his mother's DNA test came up as 83% SSA so his dad has to be in that ballpark too.

I have tried to get them to explain to me how it is that my dad was assigned the R-L21 haplogroup when both of his parents are american blacks and greater than 80% SSA, but nothing they are telling me is making sense. His maternal haplogroup BTW was L3f1b which matches my grandmother's results perfectly.

Since there is no question of my father's parentage, LOL, could someone take a stab at explaining why it worked out this way?

Don't get me wrong. I do think that haplogroup is accurate for that 17% sliver in my dad's result, but I can't understand how that one piece is the dominant paternal haplogroup.

Any ideas?
They haven't lost their minds, no offense but you simply don't understand the DNA tested, which is completely understandable.

There are three types of DNA tested
* Y DNA
* mtDNA
* autosomal DNA

The paternal haplogroup is the haplogroup of the persons Y DNA. Y DNA is only inherited from father to son. That means it doesn't represent any other ancestry than the persons direct paternal line. So that haplogroup represents a single line of ancestry, basically your father from his father from his father, etc.

It's actually immensely useful since it follows the male line which typically follows surnames, so two men of the same surname can be tested and compare and see if they share a common paternal ancestor. Because it typically doesn't change but every few generations a marker will randomly mutate it can be used to compare men's DNA around the world and among ancient remains and see that person A and B might share a paternal ancestor say 2,000 years ago, 5,000 years ago, or possibly with close matches (and potentially further testing) someone who might share a paternal ancestor 200 years ago etc.

The 81% SS and 17.1% Euro comes from autosomal dna. This is the portion of our DNA that is inherited equally from both parents... this means going up it represents random portions of all of your ancestry. Hence when looking at that data we can get ethnic percentages (though keep in mind these aren't directly proportional to your ancestry, just the random bits you happened to inherit)

There is a third type of DNA that can be tested, called mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA). It is inherited by only your maternal line...so your grandmother from her mother, from her mother etc. It has a haplogroup like Y DNA, though the letters and numbers mean something different since it's a completely different tree.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:36 PM
 
Location: CA--> NEK VT--> Pitt Co, NC
379 posts, read 313,280 times
Reputation: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alandros View Post
They haven't lost their minds, no offense but you simply don't understand the DNA tested, which is completely understandable.

There are three types of DNA tested
* Y DNA
* mtDNA
* autosomal DNA

The paternal haplogroup is the haplogroup of the persons Y DNA. Y DNA is only inherited from father to son. That means it doesn't represent any other ancestry than the persons direct paternal line. So that haplogroup represents a single line of ancestry, basically your father from his father from his father, etc.

It's actually immensely useful since it follows the male line which typically follows surnames, so two men of the same surname can be tested and compare and see if they share a common paternal ancestor. Because it typically doesn't change but every few generations a marker will randomly mutate it can be used to compare men's DNA around the world and among ancient remains and see that person A and B might share a paternal ancestor say 2,000 years ago, 5,000 years ago, or possibly with close matches (and potentially further testing) someone who might share a paternal ancestor 200 years ago etc.

The 81% SS and 17.1% Euro comes from autosomal dna. This is the portion of our DNA that is inherited equally from both parents... this means going up it represents random portions of all of your ancestry. Hence when looking at that data we can get ethnic percentages (though keep in mind these aren't directly proportional to your ancestry, just the random bits you happened to inherit)

There is a third type of DNA that can be tested, called mtDNA (mitochondrial DNA). It is inherited by only your maternal line...so your grandmother from her mother, from her mother etc. It has a haplogroup like Y DNA, though the letters and numbers mean something different since it's a completely different tree.
Thanks, but I understand all of this, but still none of this addresses how the haplogroup gets assigned.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:38 PM
 
877 posts, read 891,657 times
Reputation: 1227
Here's a good chart



The blue paternal line shows how Y DNA is passed down, red shows mtDNA... and autosomal is random inherited from all these ancestors.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:39 PM
 
877 posts, read 891,657 times
Reputation: 1227
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
Thanks, but I understand all of this, but still none of this addresses how the haplogroup gets assigned.
The Y DNA haplogroup gets assigned via the Y DNA results... which means it's only a single ancestral line. There are no autosomal haplogroups, you get percentages for that since it represents multiple lines.

The Y DNA haplogroup only represents the ancestor of that paternal line.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:41 PM
 
Location: CA--> NEK VT--> Pitt Co, NC
379 posts, read 313,280 times
Reputation: 418
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alandros View Post
Here's a good chart



The blue paternal line shows how Y DNA is passed down, red shows mtDNA... and autosomal is random inherited from all these ancestors.
Again, I get it. I am not confused about y-DNA and mt-DNA.

I am only talking about my dad so only the y-DNA.

And within his results, I am asking how was his haplogroup assigned? How was it that the SNPs for the 17% were more dominant that the SNPs for the 81% (or if you insist, halve both those numbers for just his father's portion; it's ok to ballpark it).

How? What was the methodology?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2017, 10:42 PM
 
Location: Illinois
3,168 posts, read 4,463,441 times
Reputation: 5596
Quote:
Originally Posted by naadarien View Post
I am not disputing that R-L21 is the haplogroup for the 17% of my dad's DNA.

My question is why was that given more weight and determined to be the main haplogroup designation over whatever would coincide with the 81% of his DNA results?

I get it that plenty of people get this odd result and don't care to question it, but I prefer to understand the logic behind something that seems incongruous.

Does that make sense? Why was the 17% determined to be primary? Why would anyone's DNA result ever come back with a haplogroup that wasn't not associated with the highest percentage ethnicity of their DNA?
It doesn't. I am unsure why you feel that way. He has autosomal info to consider.

I think that for a basic DNA test, you are overthinking this. Again, do you understand haplogroups? Is there something missing or misunderstood in your test ?

Haplogroups are passed down, unbroken and unchanged. Never, ever changes. Look to your autosomal info, outside of special circumstances.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Genealogy
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top